We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 16.12.4 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 16.12.4, updated 2026-09-28.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Aggressive ad load
Please Fix a Longstanding Issue With Quizzes. Paying Customers Deserve Better — Recording a lecture DOES NOT generate quizzes as advertised. I’ve ensured the recording and scribed notes are within the parameters required. The issue/error…
Terrible app very disappointed — I have this app for quite a while years ago I purchased it, let me tell you they have so many advertisement pop-ups and always they have something that the app is not loading right away it’s really not…
Not as good as it used to be — Constant ads and features that were included previously seem to slowly be making their way to being a paid add-on
Tracking and data collection concerns
Where are my notes going?? — If you want to pay money for a paper emulator for note taking this app does very well! However if you want to use those notes at a later date, good luck! This app’s file system and storage is inconsistent and…
Account now required — Have used this for years without issues. All notes saved locally. Today, attempted to review a note and it’s locked behind an account setup page. No work around other than to create a new account. I sincerely have…
Issues with privacy and laptop app — After using this app for about 2 years I have decided to give up on it due to privacy issues. I like to hand write all my notes on my ipad and then use my laptop to convert them into text and be able…
Paywall blocks the basics
SO wrong in SO many ways — I bought this app in good faith, added paid-for features, and purchased icon packs. Now you are saying that all the money I’ve invested will be good for only a year more? This isn’t right and I’m lodging a…
they are removing features and increasing prices — All the data I had access to on my ipad for notability was removed when they changed syncing your notes to the more expensive platform. I used to have all my notes shared between my mac…
Terrible Update!! Boo! — I have used this app for years now and have absolutely loved it! I have used it for college notes to using it DAILY in an elementary classroom and I have used it for personal use many times. HOWEVER! Now you have…
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
Show 7 more purchases we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.